I understand why GA is not testifying, as someone said before ( too big thread to search ) all he had to say is in the book. The twins are of course too young and Gerry as it seems, too busy. But Kate's here,she was in court, who better than her to testify all the harm the book did to her and her family? Where's the statistics of how the leads dropped once the book was released? IMHO if something dropped was the donations to the fund, that was a real tragedy! The fact that Kate is not testifying speaks for itself. Also, their legal team IMO sucks big time. From the two first days of trial it's clear that they don't have the strong case they want us to believe!

____________________"My advice to any British tourist ,please come to Portugal,please come to the Algarve but if you're coming as a family holiday treat it as a family holiday and do things together, don't leave the kids"Words from an ExPat Algarve resident

@PeterMac wrote:Are they doing this deliberately ? Do they have a death wish ? Or is it mere crass incompetence on the part of ID ?We saw in the TB trial that their star witness tried to sneak something past the Judge, but was not successful, and had to admit that there was no evidence for what she had tried to get entered into the record.Here one of their star "witnesses" - who seems not to be a witness in any conventional meaning of the term -, tried to sneak something under the wire, and has been caught out.Two other "witnesses" have tried to sneak thinks past, and have also been caught out when challenged about dates, numbers of occasions, and so forth.You would think they would have been better selected, (or better briefed !)

Maybe these are the best of the best.

I mean, would you agree to step into a witness box and lie, on behalf of a third party, under oath?

And THAT, imo, is WHY not a single one of their 'so into' 'T7 friends' hasn't volunteered to ride to their rescue.

I wouldn't expect JT/R'OB, MO/RO, or even the fragrant Fiona and Dave to be on the next plane over, THEY all have far to much to lose, unless the McS 'call their bluff' with 'something' THEY might let 'slip out'

If any of the T7 DO turn up NOW, imo, they will have been got at.

Only my personal THEORY, you'll understand.

Long time friends would have been far more convincing.

As for the tapas crew, I am rendered speechless. These are the people in whom Kate and Gerry have 100% confidence, yet they would not return for a reconstitution and, so far, no sign of them for this very important trial. They too were awarded damages from The Express newspapers - £350k I believe, that we are told they donated (in its entirety?) to Madeleine's Fund. A Fund that is pursuing more damages. They had the front to stand on the steps of the Royal Courts of Justice following their victory against the Express Group. The expression fairweather friends comes to mind.

@ShuBob wrote:Hang on. If Edgar is claiming to have worked with the PJ all these years, wouldn't that suggest the PJ are still working on the case and haven't "given up on Maddie" like the McCanns continually claim?

@tasprin wrote:I'd like to know whether Dave Edgar's claim, that he worked with Portuguese for several years after the case was shelved, will be pursued.

I'd also like to know if Emma Loach's claim, that she saw Amaral's book on sale in a UK bookshops, will be pursued. How can she possibly be considered a credible witness when her answer is blatantly untrue? Given that the lawyer specifically asked her about the UK how will she explain this one?

c) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions

GUERRA & PAZ - Do you know if the book was published in the UK?

EMMA LOACH - says she saw it in bookshops

If they pursue it, they give her a chance to backtrack, "Oh I might have been mistaken ...I might have seen it while abroad ...blah de blah blah".

As her testimony stands, she saw the book for sale in the UK. Clear and unambiguous, 100%.

If the defense case later proves that the book was never sold in the UK, Emma Loach's credibility is blown out of the water.

They should have asked her: Do the McCanns pay you for appearing here as a witness?How much?Did you make a documentary on their orders?Is that documentary telling it as it was, a true rendering of the facts?

**********

Expletive thinking deleted

**********

Q 4: I don't know, Judge

I wont be surprised they are paid a small fee for their appearance. Bit like guest stars/support casts if you like.Else why would they put aside a work's day, when time is precious, and time is money to these professionals, to testify for a pair they only met through their profession? It cant have been a novel chance to visit Praia da Luz so what makes it attractive for them to stand as witness for Mccanns? If not friendship then it has got to be MONEY.Even if they'd become friends with Mccanns unless they're socialising regularly and become close, there is no possible basis or reason to be witness for newly acquired friends especially given the mystery circumstances of the case, and given Scotland Yard is working on the case, and verdict unknown.

@PeterMac wrote:Are they doing this deliberately ? Do they have a death wish ? Or is it mere crass incompetence on the part of ID ?We saw in the TB trial that their star witness tried to sneak something past the Judge, but was not successful, and had to admit that there was no evidence for what she had tried to get entered into the record.Here one of their star "witnesses" - who seems not to be a witness in any conventional meaning of the term -, tried to sneak something under the wire, and has been caught out.Two other "witnesses" have tried to sneak thinks past, and have also been caught out when challenged about dates, numbers of occasions, and so forth.You would think they would have been better selected, (or better briefed !)

Maybe these are the best of the best.

I mean, would you agree to step into a witness box and lie, on behalf of a third party, under oath?

And THAT, imo, is WHY not a single one of their 'so into' 'T7 friends' hasn't volunteered to ride to their rescue.

I wouldn't expect JT/R'OB, MO/RO, or even the fragrant Fiona and Dave to be on the next plane over, THEY all have far to much to lose, unless the McS 'call their bluff' with 'something' THEY might let 'slip out'

If any of the T7 DO turn up NOW, imo, they will have been got at.

Only my personal THEORY, you'll understand.

Long time friends would have been far more convincing.

As for the tapas crew, I am rendered speechless. These are the people in whom Kate and Gerry have 100% confidence, yet they would not return for a reconstitution and, so far, no sign of them for this very important trial. They too were awarded damages from The Express newspapers - £350k I believe, that we are told they donated (in its entirety?) to Madeleine's Fund. A Fund that is pursuing more damages. They had the front to stand on the steps of the Royal Courts of Justice following their victory against the Express Group. The expression fairweather friends comes to mind.

Friends of Kate and Gerry McCann have accepted £375,000 in newspaper damages at the High Court.

@Ayniia wrote:I understand why GA is not testifying, as someone said before ( too big thread to search ) all he had to say is in the book. The twins are of course too young and Gerry as it seems, too busy. But Kate's here,she was in court, who better than her to testify all the harm the book did to her and her family? Where's the statistics of how the leads dropped once the book was released? IMHO if something dropped was the donations to the fund, that was a real tragedy! The fact that Kate is not testifying speaks for itself.Also, their legal team IMO sucks big time. From the two first days of trial it's clear that they don't have the strong case they want us to believe!

Yes, if KM was so worried about the harm done to the search for her daughter she should be speaking on Madeleine's behalf, by not doing so she shows what a coward and a lousy mother she really is. Any mother would fight tooth and nail for their daughter, but "oh no" not KM, she's too busy doing other things, like bringing in vulnerable witnesses who have made complete idiots of themselves and a mockery of the "search for the truth for her daughter" just to save face for KM.

Come on Kate, show some respect for your daughter and get on the witness stand and answer some of those "hard" questions like your vulnerable witnesses have had to answer.

No disparity in the factual contents then? In fact, she's promoting the book as quality wise better easier to read version. What a Hoot!

It is a hoot isn't? If the files are too much for you to get your head around then I recommend Goncalo Amaral's book 'The Truth Of The Lie' which is written in an agreeable and easy to read style (not to mention clear, concise and truthful)

No disparity in the factual contents then? In fact, she's promoting the book as quality wise better easier to read version. What a Hoot!

It is a hoot isn't? If the files are too much for you to get your head around then I recommend Goncalo Amaral's book 'The Truth Of The Lie' which is written in an agreeable and easy to read style (not to mention clear, concise and truthful)

Right, the McCanns are trying to prove they were upset by GA`s book, but how do you prove WHY the McCann`s were upset? Was their upset caused :-

(a) Because the world wouldn`t continue to look for their daughter, or

(b) Because they`d been sussed?

It would be hard for most people to realise exactly what someone is REALLY upset about, let alone new friends they`d made.

In fact, none of this wrangling can go anywhere until its proved whether or not the McCann`s had involvement in their child`s disappearance. I`m half waiting for the judge to say something along these lines.

@PeterMac wrote:Are they doing this deliberately ? Do they have a death wish ? Or is it mere crass incompetence on the part of ID ?We saw in the TB trial that their star witness tried to sneak something past the Judge, but was not successful, and had to admit that there was no evidence for what she had tried to get entered into the record.Here one of their star "witnesses" - who seems not to be a witness in any conventional meaning of the term -, tried to sneak something under the wire, and has been caught out.Two other "witnesses" have tried to sneak thinks past, and have also been caught out when challenged about dates, numbers of occasions, and so forth.You would think they would have been better selected, (or better briefed !)

That thought crossed my mind - in fact I wondered if ID had had a change of heart and was deliberately making a pig`s ear of it.

@PeterMac wrote:Are they doing this deliberately ? Do they have a death wish ? Or is it mere crass incompetence on the part of ID ?We saw in the TB trial that their star witness tried to sneak something past the Judge, but was not successful, and had to admit that there was no evidence for what she had tried to get entered into the record.Here one of their star "witnesses" - who seems not to be a witness in any conventional meaning of the term -, tried to sneak something under the wire, and has been caught out.Two other "witnesses" have tried to sneak thinks past, and have also been caught out when challenged about dates, numbers of occasions, and so forth.You would think they would have been better selected, (or better briefed !)

That thought crossed my mind - in fact I wondered if ID had had a change of heart and was deliberately making a pig`s ear of it.

@PeterMac wrote:Are they doing this deliberately ? Do they have a death wish ? Or is it mere crass incompetence on the part of ID ?We saw in the TB trial that their star witness tried to sneak something past the Judge, but was not successful, and had to admit that there was no evidence for what she had tried to get entered into the record.Here one of their star "witnesses" - who seems not to be a witness in any conventional meaning of the term -, tried to sneak something under the wire, and has been caught out.Two other "witnesses" have tried to sneak thinks past, and have also been caught out when challenged about dates, numbers of occasions, and so forth.You would think they would have been better selected, (or better briefed !)

That thought crossed my mind - in fact I wondered if ID had had a change of heart and was deliberately making a pig`s ear of it.

She'd be disbarred if she did that, wouldn't she?

Yes, if it can be proved - but I`d hardly say she was putting in her best effort - and I thought she was meant to be highly regarded in legal circles. Perhaps she coming up to retirement and is thinking what the hell.

@Ayniia wrote:I understand why GA is not testifying, as someone said before ( too big thread to search ) all he had to say is in the book. The twins are of course too young and Gerry as it seems, too busy. But Kate's here,she was in court, who better than her to testify all the harm the book did to her and her family? Where's the statistics of how the leads dropped once the book was released? IMHO if something dropped was the donations to the fund, that was a real tragedy! The fact that Kate is not testifying speaks for itself. Also, their legal team IMO sucks big time. From the two first days of trial it's clear that they don't have the strong case they want us to believe!

That is the crux of it Ayniia. The Fund accounts would give a definitive picture of how Goncalo's book affected the donations to the Fund, the losses could be illustrated with a graph and perhaps a Director giving evidence? Surely donations to a Fund is as good a gauge as any, to how the public perceived the McCanns following publication of Goncalo's book. Of course that would place the Fund open to scrutiny.

I am not really surprised Mr McCann is nowhere to be seen.He likes to be a winner, a true competitor.He does not like to be seen as a no-hoper or as an idiot.He does not like to be humiliated.

I think our Mr McCann could see the writing very clearly on this wall and decided to stay behind, obviously to look after the twins!!

The whole half-hearted effort of their 'legal' team and their 'witnesses' give the impression that this was a legal action that they wish was not taking place.Once committed to it, they had to see it through, however ridiculous it is appearing.Their regrets will increase if and when the costs of all this are awarded against them.

Eddie and Keela alerted to items and places concerned with the McCanns - and importantly to no other items or places.

According to Eddie and Keela, the body of Madeleine McCann lay lifeless behind the sofa in Apartment 5a, clinging to the only thing from which she could derive any comfort; a soft toy called 'Cuddle cat'.

Kate's book 'madeleine', Page 219: "Did they really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been removed so swiftly?"

After forensic analysis of the 'Last Photo' there is little doubt now that the pool photo CANNOT POSSIBLY have been taken on the Thursday 3rd May, but most likely on the Sunday 29th April. So, where was Madeleine at lunchtime on Thursday?

John McCann:"This was terrible for them, Kate dressed Amelie in her sister's pyjamas and the baby said: "Maddy's jammies, where is Maddy?"Martin Roberts:"If Madeleine's pyjamas had not, in fact, been abducted then neither had Madeleine McCann."Dr Martin Roberts: A Nightwear Job

Death Toll in McCann Case

Gerry McCann called for an example to be made of 'trolls'. SKY reporter Martin Brunt doorstepped Brenda Leyland on 2 October 2014 after a 'Dossier' was handed in to Police by McCann supporters. She was then found dead in a Leicester hotel room the next day. Brenda paid the price.

Colin Sahlke died suddenly in mysterious circumstances with a significant amount of morphine in his system. At the Inquest the coroner said there was no evidence as to how he had come to take morphine, and no needle mark was found.Gerry McCann had met Sahlkebefore he helped with the search but did not show any concern for his death. Link

Ex-Met DCI Andy Redwood had a "revelation moment" on BBC1's Crimewatch on 14th October 2013 when he announced that Operation Grange had eliminated the Tanner sighting - which opened up the 'window' of opportunity' from 3 minutes to 45 minutes, in accordance with their remit, to allow the staged abduction to happen.

The 'SunOnline' journalist, Tracey Kandohla: "A McCann pal told The Sun Online: "Some of the savings have been siphoned off from the Find Maddie Fund into a fixed asset account, which financial experts have advised them to do. It can be used for purchases like buying a house, or building equipment."